LSAT 117 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q24

LR Question 24 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Some people have maintained that private ownership …

QUESTION TYPE: Role in Argument

CONCLUSION: In a technologically advanced society, making the means of production public property would threaten society’s survival.

REASONING: Technologically advanced societies depend on innovation, and only private ownership allows individuals to test new technologies without needing majority approval.

ANALYSIS: The statement in question is: “Private ownership of the means of production ultimately destroys any society that sanctions it.”

Notice what the author does with this claim:

1. Introduces it as someone else’s general theory.
2. Says it may apply to some societies (less technologically advanced ones).
3. Argues that it does not apply to technologically advanced societies, because those societies depend on innovation and private ownership promotes innovation.

So the statement plays the role of a general hypothesis that the author limits to certain kinds of societies and rejects for others (answer C).

A simple analogy would be: Some people say that eating sugar is bad for everyone. That may be true for diabetics, but athletes who burn enormous amounts of energy may actually need sugar.

Here, “Eating sugar is bad for everyone” is a general claim that the author says does not apply to certain groups. The structure is the same.

___________

1. The author does not say the claim applies equally to less and more technologically advanced societies. The whole point is that it may apply to one group but not the other.
2. The argument doesn’t explain why people believe this hypothesis. It discusses whether the hypothesis is true for different societies.
3. CORRECT. The statement is a general hypothesis, and the argument says it doesn’t apply to societies that depend more on technological innovation than on resource sharing. That’s exactly what the author argues about technologically advanced societies.
4. The author doesn’t say private ownership is incompatible with the needs of any society. In fact, the author argues that private ownership is beneficial for technologically advanced societies.
5. There’s no discussion of whether a majority impedes technological innovation.